USA Politics

Flaming Blimp Crash said:
You didn't think was conspiracy when an ex-president and then presumptive nominee for the Republican ticket was shot, but a Republican-aligned talking head gets shot and there is one?
Click to expand...

In Butler the killer was killed on the spot, whereas in this case it looked as if he would vanish. In Butler's case, the way it happened to have conspiracy it would meant US government was involved which makes it more difficult at least for me to believe.
 
____no5 said:
In Butler the killer was killed on the spot, whereas in this case it looked as if he would vanish. In Butler's case, the way it happened to have conspiracy it would meant US government was involved which makes it more difficult at least for me to believe.
Click to expand...
Trump had a Secret Service detail whereas Kirk did not. Just because the Butler shooter was immediately killed doesn't mean there wouldn't have been conspiracy.

Also, what?
 
MrKnickerbocker said:
If you’re seriously considering the idea that someone paid to have Charlie Kirk shot on Wednesday, you should also pay attention to when Senate Republicans voted not to release The Epstein Files.
Click to expand...

Epstein Files case stinks no doubt.
I dislike a big portion of Trump's presidency, so don't expect me to support blindly everything he or Republicans do. Having said that, I still pick him over Biden, worlds apart.
 
I've gone back and forth on how much to participate in this topic, for a variety of reasons. The biggest thing that has kept me from fully jumping in though is the thing that I've fixated on the most since learning about the shooting and I feel has been most lost in this discussion. Now that it is starting to become more and more clear that this was an example of MAGA on MAGA violence, it feels more like something I can't ignore.

I don't believe that @Detective Beauregard @el diablo @____no5 or any of the other MAGAs shedding crocodile tears online actually care about any of this. I think they see it as an opportunity to claim moral high ground after months of mounting evidence that the creepy old guy they voted for (or defended) is probably a child rapist and at the very least enabled the most notorious child rapist of all time. To be silent while this is happening in addition to school shootings and the assassination of two democratic lawmakers but then feign outrage when there's the possibility (that now seems to have been proven wrong) that a left winger committed an act of violence is just not believable.

The fact is that we've seen an uptick in political violence since Trump got involved in politics 10 years ago. Considering Trump's success has been largely based on fomenting political violence, this shouldn't come as a surprise. The problem here isn't with "radical leftists," it's the guy at the top and the fact that he has attracted some very unsavory and ill intentioned people to his coalition, including people like Nick Fuentes who, if he didn't order the hit directly, definitely stirred his followers into a frenzy that led to Kirk's death. It's not hard to imagine that had Trump lost in November, these people wouldn't have been enabled in such a way and Charlie Kirk would still be alive. So, once again, thanks Trump voters! As long as you keep voting for violent criminals to hold high office and stay silent when violence happens against people you don't like, these sorts of events will continue to happen. I've used my voting power to try and send a message that this type of behavior is unacceptable and that elected officials lead by example and therefore should be held to higher standards. I hope one day you'll do the same, and that Kirk's unacceptable murder leads to some self reflection about the type of people who are in your cohort.

Also, you should be pressuring your Republican friends in congress to release the Epstein files and stop protecting rapists.
 
Jer said:
Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.
Click to expand...
I've seen it suggested and there's been rumblings out there that he may be a Laura Loomer or Nick Fuentes supporter. Note - none of this is confirmed.

It should be noted that MAGA is not one bloc, you've got Charlie Kirk's brand of supporters then you have Loomer and Fuentes's own brand of supporters. It should also be noted Fuentes notoriously did not like Kirk and Loomer just within the past week had been heavily critical of Kirk over the Epstein Files. Strangely enough, Fuentes made a post in the early morning today saying "if you commit violence, I disown you." This was before the suspect was even arrested.
 
Mosh said:
I don't believe that @Detective Beauregard @el diablo @____no5 or any of the other MAGAs shedding crocodile tears online actually care about any of this.
Click to expand...

You mention us for shedding "crocodile tears" and yet not a word about those who openly cheering for a murder in a forum you are moderating.

Mosh said:
The problem here isn't with "radical leftists," it's the guy at the top and the fact that he has attracted some very unsavory and ill intentioned people to his coalition, including people like Nick Fuentes who, if he didn't order the hit directly, definitely stirred his followers into a frenzy that led to Kirk's death. It's not hard to imagine that had Trump lost in November, these people wouldn't have been enabled in such a way and Charlie Kirk would still be alive. So, once again, thanks Trump voters! As long as you keep voting for violent criminals to hold high office and stay silent when violence happens against people you don't like, these sorts of events will continue to happen.
Click to expand...

If the problem is the spread of hate, then instead of blaming half of U.S. voters, start with what’s within your control: encourage people not to cheer for the assassination of a debater human being, which is clearly a form of spreading hate.
 
Jer said:
Source? I haven’t seen anything of the kind yet.
Click to expand...
this is the most comprehensive article I could find on what we know so far.

Some memes, however, aren’t so neutral. The young men who admired, and still admire, Charlie Kirk tend to be extremely online—which doesn’t necessarily mean that they all share exactly the same ideology. Internecine conflict between conservative factions is common, both on social media and at events for young conservatives. The most notable of these are the “Groyper Wars” of 2019. “Groypers” are fans of white nationalist agitator Nick Fuentes who like to hide their racism behind ironic jokes; when Kirk began making an effort to mainstream his ultra-right-wing Turning Point USA movement, Fuentes instructed them to publicly troll Kirk.
A Facebook photo in which Robinson appears to reference a Groyper meme has led to early speculation that Kirk’s killing may have been an outgrowth of these intra-far-right skirmishes. But another feature of the modern far-right is an embrace of the post-truth huckster. In these circles, it’s always possible that someone is playing a character—or will claim to be doing so, muddying the waters so no one can accuse them of having a sincere belief beyond the desire to rile up their targets. For people like this, the whole world is a forum board, where lewd public comments and real-world violence are becoming increasingly interchangeable. (Consider the messages left behind by the deceased shooter of Annunciation Catholic School, which were full of references to both other shooters and innocuous memes.)
Click to expand...
www.vanityfair.com

Groypers, Helldivers 2, Furries: What Do the Messages Left by Charlie Kirk’s Alleged Killer Actually Mean?

Suspect Tyler Robinson allegedly inscribed messages on bullet casings that reference video games and internet culture—but they hardly point toward a coherent ideology.
www.vanityfair.com www.vanityfair.com

@Flaming Blimp Crash makes a good point though that none of this is confirmed and there’s still a lot we don’t know. Frankly it seems like this was another crazy person without much of a straightforward ideology, like the guy who shot at Trump. I still maintain though that these events are a byproduct of the type of rhetoric that Trump has encouraged for a decade now.
 
____no5 said:
You mention us for shedding "crocodile tears" and yet not a word about those who openly cheering for a murder in a forum you are moderating.
Click to expand...
Still not sure what you’re talking about. In fact….

Vaenyr said:
First of all: I'm not celebrating his death.
Click to expand...
MrKnickerbocker said:
Absolutely. I’m not gloating in any way.
Click to expand...
Trevoire said:
Political violence shouldn't be the answer to anything
Click to expand...
Detective Beauregard said:
Whether you agreed with Kirk or not, this is a sad day for the USA.
Click to expand...
The Garlon said:
But no one likes political violence. This is a bad path we've taken as a nation.
Click to expand...
Diesel 11 said:
My heart bleeds with every new report about a person being killed, it bleeds when the only political action is a tweet for thoughts and prayers, and it bleeds when bad faith actors try to spin this violence into their own political issues instead of addressing the root problems.
Click to expand...
Yax said:
I think what has happened is truly awful. It is despicable. He did not deserve to get murdered while participating in discourse, and you don't solve problems by violence and Leftist public figures are condemning, and should continue to do so, this horrific act.
Click to expand...
I know you don’t like evidence based arguments, but I fail to see the cheering you are referring to, with one exception.


I did issue this guy a warning point tho.
Aggelos said:
I am. Direct your anger at me.
One less motherfucker, is one less motherfucker.
Small victory but I'll take it.
Don't you Americans have a saying that goes
"If you live by the sword,
you will die by the sword"?
So why are you so surprised?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MrKnickerbocker said:
This is partially my point. It barely made a blip. A sitting politician was murdered. Her husband was murdered. But she was on the “wrong side” and the supposedly left-wing media I keep hearing about barely ran a headline. But a private citizen with millions of social media followers on the “right team” gets days of national coverage, flags at half mast, and a medal of freedom. It’s sickening.
Click to expand...

I also didn't hear about her assassination and it's bizarre, as I am paid subscriber to no less than 3 anti-Trump US newspapers.
But if the media you are following didn't report it shouldn't you question yourself if it's worthy to keep following them?

I don't know why media report one case and not the other but before Kirk's death there was a lot of buzz in X about the Ukrainian lady that was assassinated in Charlotte public transport without any cause and people were angry that it was not reported on time by most left-wing media. I was sickened by this murder itself without digging too much which media reported and which not.

And I understand your frustration. I found it bizarre Trump ordering flags at half mast for so many days for a private citizen, where an elected official barely made the news.

Anyway, things are changing. In 60s the victims of political assassinations were Leftists, because Left was the disrupter to Status Quo and the reactionary forces on the Right.
Now that the forces of change are on the Right, we may see more violence targeting them. And Right draws more attention.
 
Blaming imaginary voices that "celebrate his death" is a cheap and cowardly tactic, as is claiming that Kirk was simply debating and exchanging opinions without ever quoting him or posting clips of said "opinions". It is pure dishonesty but that should surprise no one.

The funniest thing is that now that it's becoming clearer that the kid is a groyper (huh, so not even close to being a leftist, where's the apology @Detective Beauregard? If you have even a shred of integrity you'd admit that you were wrong, right?) the right wing media apparatus is quickly distancing itself from the story and trying to move on. Had it been a "leftist" they'd be milking the shooting for months, but now? Tweets are getting deleted, questions ignored, topics changed. Hell, Trump was asked the day after the shooting about Kirk and he couldn't care less. He was more interested talking about vanity projects lol

So, yeah. Anyone who spends their time in this thread attacking people for not being sad about Kirk's death - especially when all but one were explicitly not celebrating - but didn't have a thing to say about all the times the right attacked and/or killed people (Paul Pelosi, Melissa Hortman, the planned kidnapping of Gretchen Whitmer), let's just say none of you are being slick or clever. Your tactics and motives are pretty transparent in fact. Especially when we have an enormous amount of examples from prominent right wing figures, including GOP politicians, Kirk and friends of his, who literally cracked jokes or outright celebrated the violence against the left in those examples. Yet not a peep about that. If ONE person on the left falls out of line, the entire left is to blame. The right is filled with literal fascists, but no one wants to take responsibility. The right can get away with absolutely everything, because y'all are only interested in holding the left to impossible standards but the right to no standards at all. The hypocrisy is blatant and sickening.

So, instead of clutching pearls and playing an Oscar-worthy role of an offended and concerned member, how about y'all start being specific in your posts? Quote "problematic" posts. Quote Charlie's actual words and defend his monstrous bigotry if he's so misunderstood. No one is interested in your performances; there's no audience for that on this forum. Give us a reason to take you seriously.

Edit: Also, to make it clear, unlike some who have posted here in outrage but admitted to not having been familiar with Charlie prior to his shooting, I've been following the bullshit he's been saying for over half a decade at this point.
 
Last edited:
Vaenyr said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1800678317030564306

(Click on it to see the video)
Click to expand...
I think it's A, God's Proper Law is like a proper noun though. And B, derives from God being perfect and thus any of God's laws are divinely perfect.

(that being said, religious cherry-picking is ever omnipresent and people tend to argue their own personal beliefs through proof from scripture. And I don't believe in any of that stuff being an atheist, but as a Christian, you can make logical arguments from scriptures based around the belief system).
 
Last edited:
Yax said:
I think it's A, God's Proper Law is like a proper noun though. And B, derives from God being perfect and thus any of God's laws are divinely perfect.

(that being said, religious cherry-picking is ever omnipresent and people tend to argue their own personal beliefs through proof from scripture. And I don't believe in any of that stuff being an atheist, but as a Christian, you can make logical arguments from scriptures based around the belief system).
Click to expand...
I get that, but pointing to a single instance of plausible deniability and trying to claim that Charlie wasn't homophobic despite there being years of footage where he argues those things is disingenuous. I've said it before, but there's a reason why the media (and social media posts) that are trying to paint him as this innocent figure never actually show clips of him, only images.

jazz from hell said:
Social media is especially shocking right now. Everyone trying to prove they hate people on "the left" or "the right" even more than the next person. I'm frightened.
Click to expand...
Eh, you have folks like @Detective Beauregard who came in hot trying to blame "leftists" and the entire left without a shred of evidence. Right after the shooting you had major Fox News talking heads calling for civil war and violence against the left, despite the left having nothing to do with this shooting!

Not only that, the overwhelming majority of political violence is from the right wing and I posted a bunch of sources. Yet you keep seeing posts based entirely on emotions without any basis in reality blaming the left by the usual suspects on this forum. This distortion and denial of reality is dangerous and one of the reasons why groypers exist in the first place, to name a currently relevant example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top